blueandwhite

The Princess is stunning! I disagree about the tower though. It has a great set of stairs. For a mid-sized set I think people expect too much. I mean, how is this any different from the previous Castle line's tower? Personally my biggest gripe with the tower is that it seems better suited to a faction like the Forestmen than it does for a set of knights. It's a good set IMO.

Relax, it looks like they just uploaded another Power Miners shot. I'm sure we'll see the Kingdoms sets soon enough.

The colour change ran between 2003 and 2004. As I understand things, the UCS Star Destroyer is the only UCS set that experienced a change (you can find versions in both greys and I believe that some actually have a mixture with predominantly old grey and a few bley parts in the mix ). Essentially, this is not something that had an impact on many sets. If the set was post 2004, it's new grey; if it's pre-2004 it's old grey. Given that most Star Wars sets employ new grey, if you were looking for a Star Destroyer I would try and land a late run model as opposed to one of the old grey ones.

Waiting for the FBTB scans is really hard! Still, from the quality of photos we've seen thus far, I expect we'll finally get a great look at these sets as well as our first look at the still elusive princess figure.

For me it's been a mix of sets and Bricklink parts, as well as shop@home bricks. When LEGO first introduced their basic bulk brick orders (which were waaay cheaper back in the early 2000s), grabbing bulk bricks on the cheap was pretty easy. It was a great way to supplement less specialized bricks into your collection at an affordable price. Certainly it was far cheaper than what people have become accustomed to paying these days. Bricklink is also exceedingly cheap so long as you aren't going for the in-demand bricks. While hard-to-find minifigs may cost you an arm and a leg, a number of parts can be had for a really low price making it possible to build very large MOCs with some fantastic details on a budget. The trick has always been to stay away from expensive elements and in-demand figures which can just as easily be acquired from a set.

I actually find that the wizard looks significantly improved now that he has the black beard and the dark green body and hat. I already have a plethora of grey/bley and white beards and green wizard's hats are just as common. Seeing this figure with a dark green hat is a nice change of pace. Moreover, black beards are pretty rare and really haven't been featured in any sets so that is a nice inclusion as well. As for the pricing; I don't see what the bid deal is. As far as I can tell, these have only gone up 50 cents from the ones offered in 2008. It could be worse.

Looking at the first NY Toy Fair pics, I'm really liking what I'm seeing. It seems like we're going to have some dark pearl grey metallic Kettle Helms. It's nice to see the great helms in their proper colours. The silver and dark pearl grey helmets really provide a striking contrast. I only hope that we see some smaller sets in the future with more of the dragon knights as I would really like to stock up on those dark pearl helmets (all varriations). It's too bad that there are still no clear shots of the princess yet. Perhaps we'll see better photos later today.

The Harry Potter sets really look to be a throwback to the original two years. The figures are quite nice, but the sets themselves feel a bit uninspired IMO. I'm not really keen on the new door on Hagrid's hut which looks strikingly similar to the previous version. Hogwarts Express and Hogwarts Castle also look a bit redundant. These look like they will be great parts packs for MOCers, but I'm not overly impressed.

I like to dabble in other themes from time-to-time, but for the most part I'm exclusively castle. Even when I do venture outside of my collecting norms, I still look in part for bricks that fit with my theme (i.e., Prince of Persia looks appealing simply because it blends very well with the castle theme). I do buy certain exclusives and will by the odd non-castle set every once in a while, but for the most part I am a castle only sort of person. As MOCing is my priority, I simply don't get a nice enough ratio of useable bricks when purchasing other themes.

Personally I would probably go with the MISB set, but this is definitely a difficult decision. There's something undeniably appealing about opening a set for the first time. Moreover, the bley is probably more suitable for today's builder given that old grey is in short supply. Whatever you choose I'm sure you'll be happy as this is a fantastic set.

For me my primary factions are: Black Falcons Lion Knights (original) Black Knights (dragon heraldry) Crownies All of the other factions are treated as smaller groups or individual Knights loyal to one of the larger factions.

I'm curious; if these are due to be released in June, how are people getting their hands on them so early? There's a gallery over on brickshelf featuring the new Robin Hood figure. The poster also has an unmoderated gallery dedicated to series one. I'm looking forward to these, but these early images are making the wait pretty tough. I'd love to know how folks get their hands on these things so early. I can't think of any other LEGO releases that were leaked this far ahead of the actual release date. I'm not too pleased with some of the changes to existing pieces like the shovel or the forestman's cap. The stamped arms are also a bit disappointing. That being said, the figures themselves are quite nice so I hope they live up to everyone's expectations. It's going to be a difficult wait.

I'm torn on this. Part of me wishes that the numbering was true as it would allow me to get the figures I want first, but another part of me likes the idea of a completely blind purchase. Moreover, numbered bags would give bricklink scalpers an edge picking out the rare or more desired figs. If it is anything like other collectable items, certain figures will be plucked out of the display before the box even hits retail shelves to be sold on the secondary market at a significant markup. At least a completely blind system negates such a practice giving all consumers an equal chance at something good. I agree on the series three though. So far the first two series' have included an amazing range of figures we would likely never see in a conventional set. I'd love to see what they come up with next.

While it's true that patents typically last only 20 years, the non-functional aspects of certain elements may still be subject to copyright. In the case of the LEGO brick design, I think the courts ruled that the brick design was purely functional (it's been a long time since I've read the case). Who's to say that other bricks/elements will be subject to the same ruling. Certainly elements like the pitchfork have an element of artistry which could be subject to a copyright. The design of such elements isn't purely functional. Also, what about the common-law argument for passing-off? Given that the idea here is to make a forgery so perfect that it could easily be mistaken for the LEGO original, I'm wondering if a small company would be willing to go toe-to-toe with LEGO in a legal battle. Even if the company did prevail, the cost of waging a legal battle with LEGO would be pretty significant. I would love to hear from a lawyer on this stuff.

I would think you would be in violation of copyright (a guess on my part). I know that Mega Bloks successfully argued that LEGO couldn't copyright the LEGO brick, however I'm not certain about other, more specific designs. I'm guessing that there would be some legal hurdles to go through. Offering basic bricks is one thing; offering monorail tracks and pitchforks may be another can of worms alltogether. From a personal POV, I wouldn't want to mix clone products into my collection. Moreover, I would worry about these forgeries saturating the secondary market and being sold as a replacement for genuine LEGO. I've always appreciated the notion of keeping my collection 'pure', so for me this would be one of the most devestating developments in my collecting history. I would probably need to rethink my position on bricklink alltogether.

Full plate was worn for a span of over 300 years in Europe, so I'm not sure I would suggest that it was a quick fad. Certainly, most museum pieces we have today are tournament and parade harnesses which rarely saw actual combat, but that doesn't change the fact that for a span of three centuries wealthy aristocrats wore full plate into battle. As you mentioned, armour evolved to a point where it ceased to be effective, but it doesn't mean that it wasn't used. There is a significant change in the ways wars were fought between 1300 and 1600. Plate armour fell from use in the 1600s, but in the 1300s and 1400s where firearms were less common it was actually quite effective. In this respect I still don't see the issue of having a 12th-13th century knight without a horse. The extra horse would have been nice, but I don't think it's a serious issue.

I don't know where people get this idea. Armour was certainly heavy, but it really didn't weigh any more than the equipment a modern soldier would carry. Knights were known to dismount and could easily mount/dismount a horse. At Agincourt French knights dismounted to meet the English in combat (then again, they were slaughtered ). Wealthy men-at-arms were often as well dressed with heavy armour just as a knight would be. Honestly, the notion that Knights were imobile walking tin-cans is mere fantasy. Still, I do agree that it is disappointing that we don't get a second horse, but that's really par for the course these days. It's not like last year's Drawbridge defence included a horse for our beloved golden knight. The advant calendar looks intriguing. There are a number of new figures (a queen and prince) along with some of the more sought-after figures from the MMV. At the same time, the figure many people have identified as a black knight looks a lot like a troll IMO. Either way, this year's calender looks great with several unique figures and useful bricks (an extra suit of armour never hurts). I hope that some of the figures like the blacksmith and the medieval woman are actually placeholders for different designs, but I suspect that we are going to get the same ones we recieved in the MMV. You would think they could have at least changed the medieval woman's hair though.

I'm not implying that the value of these figures won't increase. I am simply observing that some figures will inevitably carry a premium over others. The hoplite and cheerleader for example are figures one might want in larger quantities causing their value to be inflated when compared to say the skateboarding kid. Even with the early discussion on these figs it is fairly evident that certain figures are more coveted than others. Some are etremely unique (the Mexican, the Clown, and the Nurse to name a few) with distinct elements not found in any existing theme. Others are simply varriants on existing figures. The Ninja, the Cowboy, the Native American and the Diver are examples of figures which can already be made using existing elements with only a few minor varriations. While, that isn't to suggest that these figures aren't wonderful in their own right, I'm not convinced that each figure will carry the same premium in the future. It's a lot like trading cards; some command a huge value on the secondary market while others aren't worth the paper they are printed on. Not all of these figures are going to command the same trade value. While 1:1 trades are possible, I expect that some figures are going to carry a pretty heavy premium over others. Put it this way; I'm not going to trade a robot or a cheerleader straight up for a crash test dummy or a magician and I suspect I'm not the only one who will take this position.

Beyond the original staples of LEGO (Town, Space, Castle and to a lesser extent Pirates), there aren't many themes that survive more than 2-3 years so it shouldn't really come as much of a surprise to people that Power Miners are heading into the sunset. I can understand that people are disappointed when this sort of thing happens, but it's pretty much inevitable as it allows for the development of a new theme. LEGO is a children's toy, so you have to figure that there is quick consumer turnover as newer buyers come of age and older children move onto other hobbies and interests. Still, for those of you who loved the theme there is still some time to pick up the remaining sets. Hopefully LEGO will have something new for you next year to fill the void.

Pricing isn't a question of opinion. Ratshot is from Canada. The pricing is different up here, just as it is different in Australia, Asia and Europe. The ARC-170 is $79.99 CDN.

Generally speaking, I think it's very hard to follow LEGO's pricing trends. Sometimes pricing for certain items seems entirely reasonable across regions, while other times the difference in pricing seems utterly baffling. Licenced products are even harder to place because the pricing for these items seems even more inconsistant from region to region. Then again, that could have just as much to do with the licence holder than LEGO itself. Annecdotal evidence of a price change doesn't necessarily represent an actual change in a given region considering we don't even know how well certain sets sell across different product lines or if a change in price in one area isn't compensated by a comprable increase in price on another set of items. These days, the quality issue is a bigger concern than price anyhow. LEGO has always been a premium brand that commanded a high price, but then again the product has traditionally been top-notch. I would rather see higher prices if it ensured that the quality remained high.

I think that you hit the nail on the head here. The gambling element is nothing new. Most of us remember collecting similar items as children. Part of the fun was opening the package to see whether you scored the card/fig that you coveted or whether you would need to go back and do it again. I remember trading cards and trying to complete sets as a child. It wasn't cheap and more often than not you'd end up with a large number of duplicate cards, but it was fun. I look at these figures as being a way to rekindle that experience. I won't break the bank on these, but I am looking forward to collecting them. I'm even more excited about the prospect of trading them with like-minded AFOLs. While not every figure will carry equal value on the aftermarket, part of the fun of working out a trade is trying to come to an agreement where both parties get something without feeling shortchanged. This line will no doubt be the bain of many army builders, however it should be a good deal of fun for the rest of us.

Actually, I think the opposite is true. If anything, the people who are saying that they want to know what figures they are getting are looking at the situation selfishly (not that there's anything wrong with that). Collecting like this has always appealed to children. Kids have collected everything from trading cards to Kinder Surprise eggs. I actually find that kids are more accepting of this sort of things than most adults will every be. What I'm hearing right now is several older fans who are simply upset that they cannot just buy the 3-4 figures they actually want and pass on the rest of the line. Army collectors are upset that they won't be able to amass an army of Greek hoplites without spending hundreds of dollars simply to pick up 10-20 of these guys. I understand the complaints, but the "think of the children" tag is just rhetoric. I personally hate collectable products like this, but I totally understand LEGO's motive and I suspect that this will go over pretty well with a lot of kids. With that in mind, I actually expect the female figs to be fairly rare, simply because they aren't necessarily the most popular thing with boys ages 8-12.

I certainly am of the opinion that the AFOL community has a larger voice today in LEGO's product development than it did a few years back. I don't think our input is as big as some fans would have you believe, but I do think that there is a positive dialogue between the community and TLG. Lines like last year's Pirates, this year's Kingdoms and the minifig collector's series certainly seem to at least in part recognize some of the unique interests of AFOLs. These lines may not be the biggest sellers for LEGO, but they certainly go a long way to keeping the AFOL community involved in the hobby. And honestly, who would have ever expected the wide range of UCS sets or the CC-style sets we've had over the last decade? We certainly aren't the dominant voice moving the gears at TLG, but they certainly recognize that we're here.

What is so childish about this year's line compared to the fantasy theme we've had for the past few years? The set design itself seems to be pretty much on par with the older stuff, and we finally have two factions which aren't overtly good/evil; something we haven't seen since the 1990s. If anything, I find that this line seems a bit more sophisticated than the previous Castle line. I can understand that fantasy fans (as opposed to fans of the middle ages) might find the move away from dwarves, skeletons and trolls to be a bit of a disappointment, but for many of us this line is a much needed change for castle. I just don't get where this childish label comes from.